Conviction for Failing to Provide a Specimen for Analysis Overturned

Pragma Law helped a driver already convicted of failing to provide a specimen for analysis successfully challenge the conviction. Our client had previously received a 12-month driving disqualification following his conviction. He attended court without a solicitor and was unaware that he faced the loss of his licence if found guilty of the offence. A misleading notice from the police meant he thought he was facing penalty points only and did not realise the seriousness of the charge.

When he went to court, he was offered free legal advice from the duty solicitor. This free service is offered to all defendants facing a potentially imprisonable charge such as drink driving, drug driving or failing to provide a specimen. It is only available at the first court hearing.

Wrong Advice at Court

After a brief consultation, the duty solicitor advised him to plead guilty to the charge. He was informed he had no defence and would find himself in a worse position if he were to try to defend himself.

Unfortunately, this advice was incorrect.

He entered his guilty plea and was devastated when the magistrates court banned him from driving for 12 months. When he arrived at court that morning, he had no idea that his licence was at risk.

Contacting Pragma Law

Upon recommendation, he contacted Lucy Whitaker to discuss his case. Lucy advised him that it was extremely rare that a guilty plea could be challenged after a person had been sentenced. The minimum penalty for failing to provide a specimen when driving is a 12-month ban, so there was no chance of appealing the sentence.

However, after listening to what happened before the police requested a specimen, Lucy formed the view that the case was extremely unusual. Following a formal consultation and consideration of the papers, it was clear that the duty solicitor had given the individual the wrong legal advice. He had a clear defence and should have been advised to plead not guilty.

Police Procedure

The duty solicitor failed to notice that the police had no power to request the sample in the first place. If the police have no legal authority to request a breath, blood or urine sample, no offence can be committed if the person fails to provide the sample. The circumstances of the case meant that a medical professional should have been consulted and their permission sought before the request was made. This never happened, and there was no other evidence that he was under the influence of drink or drugs.

Lucy fought hard to persuade the magistrates’ court to reopen the case, but the application was initially met with a lot of resistance. Lucy represented the driver in court and ultimately persuaded the magistrates that our client had been wrongly convicted because of poor legal advice. They agreed that it would be in the interests of justice for the matter to be reopened. Our client then pleaded not guilty, and a date for trial was set.

The Outcome

Thankfully, the prosecution was persuaded to discontinue the case before trial after considering the points Lucy made in court. Our client was delighted to have his licence back and vowed to ensure he got the best legal advice if he ever needed help in future.

This case proves that not all legal advice is the same. Our specialist knowledge comes from dealing with motoring offences every day. This means we can spot defences that other solicitors may overlook.

Need help with your case?